National Republican., 1887-07-12
Practical Temperance Legislation.

The state Of Maryland In 1891 passed an
act raising revenue for the state, aud the
second section read, "That all importers OF
foreign articles or commodities, OF dry
goods, wares, or merchandise, by bale or
package, or OF 'cine, ram, brandy tchisky,
and other distilled spirituous liquors, &C.,
and other persons selling the came by
wholesale, bale or package, hogsheai, bar
rel, or tierce, shall before they are author.
lied to sell take out license" &c. The
penalty was forfeiture Of the goods and
fine colectible by Indictment.
The firm of Brown Brothers e Co., Of
Baltimore, importers, refused to pay the
license; were indicted and fined in the Bati-
more court; carried the case up to the Mary
land court of appeals, which affirmed the de.
cieion Of The court below, and finally to the
Supreme Court of the United States.
Elaborate arguments were made before
the Supreme Court, the whole question
at issue being the right Of the state to in.
terfere with commerce between the United
States and foreign country. The attor-
neys for Brown, one Of whom was after
ward chief justice Of the United States
himself, held that the law Of Maryland was
in contrayentlon of two clauses of the
constitution Of the United States, viz: para
graph 8, section Of article /, which says,
"Ihe Congress shall have power % q % to
regulate commerce with foreign nations,
snd among the several States, and with the
Indian tribes;' and paragraph 2, section 10
OF article l, which says, "No state shall,
without the consent OF Congress, lay any
impost duties on imports or exports, except
what may be absolutely necessary for exc
cutting its inspection laws."
Chief Justice Marshall delivered the
opinion OF the court (l2 Wharton, 4l0).
treating the subject exhaustively. lie up
held both claims made by the pla!ntins ami
held that the state had no right to impose
restrictions on commerce. He said mo
goods would be imported II none could BE-
sold. 81 The right to sell Is con-
nected with the payment Of duties" On
the power Of Congress to control commerce
Justice Marshall said : "The power is CO.
extensive with the subject on which 1t acts.
Congress has right not only to
authorize importation, but to authorize
the importer to sell. a What does
the importer purchase (when he pays
duties) II he does not purchase the priv!-
lege to SELL"
Pursuing this line Of argument, Chief
Justice Marshall said the United States
could not justify its action to any foreign
power, II called to account, II 1t permitted
the states to prevent the sale of goods
which 1t made person pay for the priv
ilege Of importation; and he held that II the
power to tax sales of imported goods in
the original packages was admitted, the
power to prohibit was also admitted. The
court therefore denied the power to tax.
A long line OF cases follow this precedent, :,
both in the ULited States aud state courts.
These decisions show the folly of the at.
tempt in Maine to prevent the sale OF i'm
ported liquor in the original packages. II
States are not allowed to tax, Of course they
are not allowed to prohibit, and the case
cited expressly declares they can do neither,
though the question Of prohibition was not
before the court.
Gov. Bodwell and the Maine prohibit
tionists should not waste either time or
hh'hSy W piCFcup w JuhiCiu
measures the sale Of liquor In imported
packages. That question is settled by the
highest authority in this comtry-the su
preme Court Of the United States-and the
decision will not be changed, because it
ought not to be.
What is wanted is a change Of law as to
importatlons, such as has heen heretofore
suggested by the NATIONAL REPUBLICAN,;
and II Gov. Bodwell will devote himself to
that end he will succeed.
The duties on liquors should be made SO
high as to be practically prohibitory. A
rigid inspection of all imported liquors
should be required so that whatever was
brought into the country should be what It
is claimed to be and not vile poisonous
mixtures, such as are now imported, and
such packages should be prescribed by law,
so as TO practically prevent a retail trade as
conducted under the present law.
A bill containing these provisions could
I've made law at the first session of the
tiftie,h Congress. 1t is the first step the
| prolibitionists should take Such q meas
ure would become law, almost without
opposition. Will some OF our temperance
friends try itS